Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  June 28, 2011 12:30pm-1:30pm EDT

12:30 pm
to our program, for the presidency with mark halperin of time magazine. we don't really though if michele bachmann will he stayg power, to one hagone after her, the scrutiny of her has just begun, chirchtion in her conservative record. he took federal money for a family farm, questions about how much she benefitted from those things, but nonetheless, when the scrutiny comes we will have to see how she holds up. >> we continue with a look at the new law in new york sta on same-sex marriag with nicholas confessore of the morning time, toobin of the new york magazine and cnn and from los angeles, adam mc54 any of "the new york times". >> yo you will see a lot of peoe get invited to a gay marriage, it won't bes strange as
12:31 pm
before, the overall effect is those who oppose gay marriage are at a certain point going to start steaming like a bit o out liars at least in theeneral elecrate, we are nothere yet but i think we will be there in the next four or five years. >> rose: we look at a new documentary about the new york times called page 1, inside "the new york times", we talk to three people featured in the documentary, they are david car, bryan sfelter and gay toliz. >> the suggestion of people not only could "the new york times" go out of business, but that it would be a civic good that it did, i find to be fatuous and silly, because we have lost so much journalistic horsepower from the ecosystem of news that it could be regardless of the organization's faults which are, you know, we could argue about all day long, you can't aord to lose the boots on the ground, the muscle that, you know, the 1,100 women and men that, you know, make the phone calls, that go to the place. >> rose: michele bachmann's
12:32 pm
candidacy, same-sex marriage and inside the new york times when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose was provided by the following. >> >> every storyeeds a hero we can all root for, that beats the odds and comesut on top, but th isn't just a hollywood storyline, it is happening every day, all across america. every time a storefront opens, or the midnight oil is burned, or when someone chase as dream, not just a dollar. they are small business owners, so if you want to root for a real hero, support small business. shop small. >> rose: additional funding provided by these funders.
12:33 pm
>> and by bloomberg. a provider ofultimedia news and information svices worldwide. >> from our captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: congresswoman michele bachmann declared her presidency for the presincy of the united states today, she made her announcement in her birthplace of waterloo, ia. >> i didn't seek plic office for power or fortune, but simply to make life better in our community and o public schools that are for our children and now i seek the presidency, not for vanity, but because america ist a crucial moment and i believe that we must make a bold choice if we are to secure the promise of our future. we cannot afford four more years
12:34 pm
of barack obama. >> rose: bachmann is a tea party favorite and joins romney of massachusetts, pawlenty of minnesota, and newt gingrich, former alaska governor sarah palin has yet to announce her decision, joining me now from washington, mark halperin of time magazine, welcome, sir. >> good to see you, charlie. >> rose: who is she? give me a sense of what he is as a person and as a politician. >> well, the first thing i would say is, she is proving right now that politics is still, filled with the unexpected, very few people and i put myself in this group would have thought of her as a serious player in this nomination fig, up until the new hampshire debate just a few days ago, since then she has been remaking herself in a remarkable and skillful way, she is someone relatively new to politics and only been in the house of representatives f a few terms, she is someone w has a following national liam mongs tea party conservatives,
12:35 pm
religious conservatives, homeschools not respected by some of her colleagues on capitol hill but a real force now in this presidential process, even if she doesn't end up the nominee. >> rose: does she have advisors helping never in terms of her public political rollout? >> she does indeed, she has some experienced people who have been with her a while and she brought in some people, some from mike huck beebe huckabee's campaign, ed rollins, when he ran for a second term, brought in ed g improvement az, one of the top pollsters in the republican party, brett o'donnell who is one of the best forensic coaches in the rublican party, they are working with her very closely, they are preserving what has made her a national figure among certain americans, while trying to expand her appeal, and if you watched her on her sunday show performances over the weekend, if you watch her in the intervis she has done around her announcement today, he is extraordinarily skillful in choosing words and
12:36 pm
how she is presenting herself, the mainstream michelle bachmann people on the left will scream and howell this isn't who she is, she makes mistakes that -- they are tryingo put that in the past and she is trying to deflect and sand the rough edges off what is a follow dollar rising per, parizing persona to make her more acceable. >> rose:his is chris wallac onunday, roll the tap >> are you a flake? >> well, i think that would be insultinto say somhing like th, because i am a serious person. >> but you understand when i say that that is what the rap on you is. >> well, what i would say i that i am 55 years old, i have been married 33 years, i am not only a lawyer, i am a postctorate degree in federal tax law from william and mary and worked in serious scholarship and in work in the united states federal tax court, my husband and i raised five kids, we have raised 23 posterior children and applied ourself to education reform and
12:37 pm
started a charter school for at risk kids and also been a state senator and member of the united states congress five years. i have been very active in our business as a job create the for and i understand job creation and we have been actively, have been active in the movement in washington, dc with those who are affiliated with fiscal reform, do you -- a i think it is important to say that, but do you recognize that now that you are in the spotlight in a way you weren'tefor that you have to be careful and n say what some regard as flaky things? >> well, of course a person has to be careful with stament that they make, i think that is true, and i think now there will be an opportunity to be able to speak fully on the issues, i look forward to that. >> rose: it seems to me she did quite well in that answer. >> pitch perfect in all of her answers, i mean, you know, charlie people like i say sit and watch these interviews and we critique them and score them like we are watching some sort of theatre performance. i think her answers are pitch perfect for what she is trying
12:38 pm
to execute, preserve th parts of michelle bachmann that a appealing to her current pporters while reachin out to people and presenting herself, if you take her resume, as she .. enunciated it there, what she has done with her career and what she has done in terms of foster children and raising her own family she has a remarkably compelling story, it has been obscured for most of the national media and for a lot of republicans, mainstream republicans by her outrageous statements at times, by hermes statements at times, but she is toning all of that down in a way that is, again, got the potential to broaden her appea >> rose: okay, but what should we be saying about those statements that you just characterized as outrageous? i mean what is it she is saying that is outrageous? >> well, in the past, i mean the one people have really focused on in the last couple of days is she told chris matthews that she agreed with the motion that president obama was potentially unamerican, anti-american and she wouldn't really explain that, she backed off that a little bit this weekend.
12:39 pm
she has been adivisiveigure, one part of the reason he is so beloved by the right is because she said things right on the edge of acceptable and sometimes over about the president, and about the democratic party. >> rose: does this make it more or less likely that sarah palin will run? >> well, that is a good question, i always like to say predicting what governor palin is going to do islike predicti the actions of the north korean government , there is no rational data to rely on, i think governor palin could look at her and say i can do that and do it bter and bigger, so there is clearly room for me, on the other hand, she may say, michelle bachmann is now at the top of the polls in iowa and has a fund-raising base and up and running with a staff, maybe it would be difficult to overtake her given that they do share a lot of the same voter appeal in iowa and in south carolina and nationally. >> rose: in iowa she is tied with mitt romney. >> and they are at the top and who one is even close. they are both in the low 20s,
12:40 pm
herrmann cane, who i don't think many people will win iowa necessarily is ten percent, everybody is below that, the thing that i michelle bachmann has, the big three we discussed before, mitt romney .. john huntsman and ten pawlenty, none of those three guys will ever walk into a room and have people act like a celebrity or a rock star just walked in the room, it is just not their nature. last three people elected president of the united states barack obama, gege bush, bill clinton all had that in spades and in the culture in which we live now that is big deal, that is something you would rather have than not have in presidential politics, michele bachmann has that in spades and in iowa when he is in living rooms and seeing somebody they have seen for years on tv and from iowa, she announced in iowa but not spent all that much time there, but she is going to be able to make up her lost time because she is already so well-known to the kind of conservative activist who participates in the caucuses and she will do well in debates based on what she did in new
12:41 pm
hampshire. >> if she keeps that up she will do well this the debates, again i am so impressed by what she has done in the last few weeks since she started working with the new advisors and since she decided to enter the race, there is a straw poll in august in iowa, that the republican party puts on there, i suspect she will do very well at that, her appeal, her grass root support her celebrity is taylor made for that kind of event. >> rose: speaking of other political news, huntsman, how has he done since his announcement? >> you know, a lot of people looked at the announcement and were a little disappointed, his energy level, his aggressiveness or lack of aggressiveness, is off putting to some peoe, i think the realey for hi is fund-raising, because the way he is going to establish himself as a credible candidate is if he is able to raise, not money, but the first couple of weeks of his candidacy to show he is a first tier candidate in some -- a category that is really important in terms of mon. he is, i think, got the
12:42 pm
potential based on fund-raising and based on wha what happens in iowa straw poll to eclip tim pawlenty as the most likely romney alternative but he and everybody else is oversdowed by michele bachmann and so r by rick perry the governor of texas who may also enter the investigation and also would be the kind of high energy, grass roots supported candidate that could put the big three in a disadvantages you position when it comes to energizing crowds and building support. >> rose: you, you have become almost like tim russell was in terms of people waiting and then argue about whatever your pronouncements are. i am now preferring to -- this is what he said, quote, in a profile he wrote for the new york times sunday magazine about john huntsman he said, quote, halperin declared huntsman to be more comfortable campaigner than even george w. bush or barack obama a pronouncement that struck even huntsman own aids as
12:43 pm
implausible but dutifully disseminated it to the press. >> you know, i haven't gone back and checked the tape but i think my friend is slightly misquoted me, i don't think he said he was better than those gs i said he was as food as them and he was, when i saw him in new hampshi he was as a grass roots campaigner and a gun shop in a harley store, vfw hall, he was extraordinarily good talking to people, and i tched him at a town meeti in mielment last week sitting, you watch these events, charlie, anyone who covered politics, sitting with business people, talking about the economy, it was a more genuine and human exchange where he really listened to what they were saying, he really was seeking ideas than i have seen any candidate do. those are his strong points his weak points which i am more familiar watching now for a second time in florida, he is still does not project well. he still does not have the kind of high energy rhetorical presentation that voters he really want and there is no
12:44 pm
doubt the animating spirit within the republican pay right now is get barack obama out of office. and he is running not just a campaign based on civility but he often doesn't mtion or barely mentions barack obama in his stump speech that is a real weakness for a party w from the far right of the party to the center right of the party has, again, as they are animating, unifying force, get rid of barack obama. >> rose: animus toward the president which really you nights them in some cases. >> the is this you and i both believe in, that a narrative can make a difference in terms of giving you traction as a candidate, especially when you are at the beginning. romney narrative seems to be, i am the guy, i am a manager and i can manage this economy back to prosperity. huntsman's narrative is what? civility? or what? >> that is a good question. i think not all that defined, i think his narrative is we need to make different choice ms. this country that we are
12:45 pm
currently making but with reasoned rhetoric rather than shoiting voices. >> rose: and pawlenty's narrative? >> paul plenty's narrative is, i was a governor in a blue state and i governed in a conservative fashion and can do the same thing in washington. >> rose: and get america to five percent gdp growth in five years or some remarkable projection. >> as a goal, that would be awesome if he could do it. >> and bachmann's narrative? >> i think that is still in formation, i think her narrative revolves around the notion that she is an outsider, even though he is a member of congress and ironically the only sitting officeholder in the field right now, she is someone who says, i will challenge my own party when i disagree with them, rather than saying i am a loyal republican, you know, no matter what happens. so as an grass roots, on a grass roots outside irrelevant who can go to the white house and shake things up, but because she is
12:46 pm
standing, sanding down these rough edge i think wherehe ends up on some issues where in the past she has been on the barricades, maybe a little bit different d will be interesting to watch. >> ros the debate within the republican party will be what? >> well, that is a plate question, i still think the end of the day it is going to be about electability, i still think the person who looks the strongest against the president will be -- againstarack obama will be the nomine mitt romney has played his hand very strongly, he has had a weekend in some ways based on healthcare, based on the narrative about him as a flip flopper who is not genuine i think they have done some tactical and strategic things that have been smart to get him to this day going into the year he was the front runner, he is a stronger front runner with a financial reports come out about second quarter fund-raising he will even be a stronger front runner i think the narrative will be can someone knock off mitt romney and is that an establishment candidate like
12:47 pm
romney or tea party candidate like a bachmann or palin or a rick perry. >> rose: and huntsman is hoping that in fact is true, because he believes he can make a case for electability an because will aeal to independents and if he can do that, he will have the party maybe not be so upset over the fact he worked for obama and that kind of thing? >> that is correct, and i still think, you hear areat debate in the republicaparty about the fact he served as ambassador to china under barack obama is disqualifying my gut tells me it is not but there ar plenty of smart republicans that it absolutely disqualifying, again, when the animating factor in the party is, force is we don't like barack obama why would we dominate someone who intent two years working for barack obama? >> rose:. >> clearly some people that will be a problem. huntan can either knk romney off or if he is strong enough to stay in the race, he could be the beneficiary ifomney is basically knocked o bmichele bachnn or rick perry, huntsman could step forward and say the
12:48 pm
establishment, while rom my is too weak but i am right here to pick up the pieces and save you from someone who you don't think is electable because there are plenty of establishment republicans who do not view michele bachmann or rick perry as electable in a general election. >> so if if he can gog to new hampshire which is close to massachusetts and beat bachmann and win -- >> yeah. >> rose: he has got the momentum to roll into south carolina? >> i think if he -- if he is able to win iowa a new hampshire he will win the nomination right then and will, it is very rare somebody wins both of those and it could happen, they are down playing it, he doesn't want the expectation he will play big in iowa he did poorly in iowa after spending a lot of time and money there, he will clearly spend less time, he could draw in some money at the end, the most likely outcome of this contest is romney wins the nomination after a big scare or two against one or more strong challengers, e second most likely outcome is romney wins the nomination winning iowa and winning new
12:49 pm
hampshire, and then rolling forward into south carolina, utah, super tuesday or nevada super tuesday in a way that money can touch him. >> rose: does front runner help him or hurt him? >> it helps him historically, i mean the republican party has nominated the front runner every election since reagan, so i mean being the front runner historically has been a good place to be and like i said i think they have done a skillful job of leveraging the positive parts of being a front runner, particularly a fund-raising and hiring of staff and they have been able toeep the narrative from being solely about healcare, flip flopper, which is still part of the conversation, but the more he can keep that out of the front, the front of people's minds, the stronger he can be and the more likely it is he enters 2012 the way he entered 2011, which is as the front runner. >> historic legislatation in new york state as the senate
12:50 pm
approved same sex marriage, the republican majority and all but one democrat passed a marriage equality act, 11:55 p.m. andrew cuomo signed the bill into law which will go into effect late next month, it makes the new york the sixth and largest state to legalize same-sex marriage and joins connecticut, iowa, vermont and but as well a washington, d.c., many are wondering how this law will impact the on going debate over the rights of gays and leians in this country, jeffrey toobin of new yorker magazine and adam nagourney of "the new york times" i mad to have all of them he. give me the legal fix. >> it is up to eh state at thisoint, and many states, i believe it is 29; is that right, have constitutiol amendments saying that they can not. >> new yorker, we are like big picture guys. now, 29 states, and it really looks like the proposition eight
12:51 pm
case will end one way or anotr with california having same-sex marriage, so soon it seems likely there are going to be approximately a quarter of the people in the country living in a state with same-sex marriage. the question i have is, when will the supreme court arrest the issue? because i don't ink they are in any rush to do it. i think at the end of the day they will say that same-sex marriage is a constitional right,ou can't have one kind of marriage for straight people and one kind of nonmarriage for gay people. but i don't think they are in any rush to do that and i think it will maybe be five years or maybe be ten years and at that point the whole country will have it. >> rose: will they be, will they be able to pass i >> no with roe v. wade the supreme court will say it is a fo of discrimination, it is a violation of the fourtnth amendment to the constitution to prohibit gay people from getting married .. so you states who are banningit, too badyou can't do that anymore, think, i think
12:52 pm
that is five or ten greerz now. >> is there a case now in the works nowhat is challenging it that may make s way up. >> certainly the proposition eight case could go up, but my sense is if the plaintiffs who are the people challging proposition 8, david boys and ted alston, if they win they are going to win in california and that'st. i don'i don't think that case ig to go to the supreme court, so other than that, there is not a kiss that is sort of on the press pin. >> rose: those cases are on the same side. >> yes. >> here is what you wrote, eric holder decision to section 3 of the strikes me as very big news, it is really all about preside obama self-proclaimed evolving position on same sex marriage but you will have to bear with me to explain why. five the, plai why. >> this i the case i think the supreme court islikely to take up first. the defense of marriage act, this law that was passed under president clinton and signed by president clinton said the federal government will not
12:53 pm
recognize any same sex marriage, so in th the state of massachusetts, the day people who are married are just as married as the investiging people , there is no difference, but they are treated differently under, say, the internal revenue code, when a married couple, raight couple, one party dies the money passes tax plea to the spouse. the case in massachusetts is about go women who were married, one of them died, the money -- the money that would have passed tax entry was taxed because the federal government, the irs doesn't recognize same sex marriage, that case lawing that the defense of marriage act is unconstitutional is now before the first circuit court of appeals and i think this case, i mean the new york vote makes it more likely that the supreme court will take that case and over turn that aspect, i think that is a big difference in terms of the legal atmosphere as a result of new york having
12:54 pm
passed the law. >> rose: adam, do you think we will see in new york state a lot of people in new york state, rushing to get married? >> do i, i mean even friday night, i was in touch by e-mail with lots and lots of friends who are talking about getting married. my sense is, there is this law is kind of a validatn and i am not being new york superior at all but it kind of gives it validation, that it did not ve before, it is sort of a broader social acceptability not just because of the size of new york but because it was a bipartisan vote that is a huge deal i think, i think you will see a lot of people getting married i new york and aot opeople flying to new york to get married because as i undstand the law you don't have to be a new york resident to be married in new york as sapame sex couple i think y will see a pig wave of marriages. >>ose: tell me about the great drama in al pan any. i think there are a few moment ms. the four and a half years i was there that could really compare t to this momentn albany, first the vote was in doubt, this is a place where votes are almost never in doubt, you kind of know what is going
12:55 pm
to happen when it comes to the floor, more importantly the last two senators kept a very tightly, he's two republicans, chris assistant and salante until the very moment of the vote. he spoke for at least three, our, five minutes before he said he would vote for this will, bill, the only people who knew for them were the for and each of them and in fact, governor cuomo had not even told these two senators that the other one was the 33rd vote, it wasso kept quiet and it was deliberate, they were trying to essential have kind of a stealth campaign to avoid attracting too much attention from catholic leaders, from religious ornizations and rely kind of bum rush in the last couple of days and i think there were people who very advocates in the hallways, who were on tender hooks the whole time, they hoped but weren't surentil the very, very end if it would pass. >> and why did those republicans say they voted for it? >> stephen who is a lawmaker, a
12:56 pm
veteran lawmaker and a lawyer from hudson valley, he said he had dealt with -- >> having voted against it before. >> he voted against it before in 09 and he said, his explanation was he had worked with the vernor to ensure there would be provisions for religiouexemption in the bill, they amended it over the course of, you know, a week, and the second one, mark chris sant, a freshman member, a republican, and a democratic district in buffalo with aot of voters who are not going to be happy with this and a pie who, when he campaigned for office said he would oppose this stood up and gave what was the most fascinating speech where he said basically i am a lawyer, i thought about this, i can't think of an argument against it. i am not sure i believe in it, morally, but i can't think of a good argument against civil marriage provision for gay couples. >> and what roll did andrew cuomo play. >> clearly this has political consequences for him in a positive way, i assume? >> it does, well the
12:57 pm
consequences, i will bet to first. this is a guy whspent post of the last six months cutting spending, cutting budgets, avoiding tax hikes, dpleasing the base of his own party, but pleasing from the poll numbers the vast majority of new yorkers wh watched albany over spend in their minds and so for a guy who had not really demonstrated his credentials can th some liberals this is aigantic thing for him. i am noteing trite here but you cod fire half a state work force now and he would not have a ton ton of blowback from the base of his party because this is such a huge thing for everybody d a huge victory for him and gives him enormous capital on the left to allow him to be a physical conservative in a state that hasn't always bn. >> were you surprised he was able to do this? >> i was surprised, because the votes simply were not there. the meure died easily in 2009, and every republican voted
12:58 pm
against it, even some democrats ted against it, and they started by announcing a couple of votes from democrats two weeks ago, but until that moment, there actually had been no visible movement, no progress, no change in the vote count, and even the gornor was sending out signals that he wasn't totally sure he could pull it off. so to actually, y know, as we were saying to actually pull republicans into in this is the first time i believe anywhere in the country that a chamber of legislature controlled by republicans has passed a gay marriage bill. i mean, it is astounding when you think about it it creates a new model for vocates who were trying to try to break it out of being a partisan issue and mak it kin o a cscience issue for people. >> rose: adam, you covered national politics for a while, tell us what the implications are. >> you immediately saw the sort of over heated political environment, you know, andrew cuomo front runner 2006 teen and that is just us being up, but, but the fact of the matter is ..
12:59 pm
i think, i take total blame for this, the fact of the matte is andrew cuomo is thinking of running r president in 2006 teen the way his father did or whatever year he almost did, whatever that year was, charlie, not because of the issues so much but because of money this is aig issue, one of the first ways people like us and insiders judge a candidate's viability is by their ability to raise money and so we will see later this week when theirst quaer must be come out in the presidential republican candidates and money is a huge deal, it has been a huge deal since 1992, i think that, and polling has shown this the world is changing and a generational split here and you can see it this polling and cut across party lines as well and that is that people over, i think the age differential is 40 or 405 tend to be against gay marriage, people under 40 cannot be against gay marriage i think it is a issue that counts less and less, i think as we go more and more into time it w't matter that much, not that people have passionate people, the younger people have paionate feelings about it, it is like who cares. >> rose: i am more skeptical
1:00 pm
that the nation is moving that fast, that quickly, i mean one of thekey moments i think of the 2010 midterm elections were the three iowa suprem court justices who were voted out of office entirely because they had voted in favor of same sex marriage. the debate, the cmn debate with the republican candidate. >> rose: a couple of weeks ago. >> every candidate called for a constitutional amendment banng sa-sex marrie, in any state, including new york and massachuses that already have it, now, those amendments are not going to happen, there would never be enough support for it but i think that indicates the republican party is very dug in on this, and i don't see the republican primary electorate being any bit affected by the new york vote, so, you know, yes, new york will change, california will change, but i think the vast middle of t country it is a long way from having same-sex marriage. >> rose: how disappointed -- >> i may disagree with that, i will point out one thing, especially on the candidates of
1:01 pm
the debate, i would be surprised if whoever the ultimate nominee is in that republican nomination fight is talking a lot about gao deal -- the country is not moving that fast and republican electorate as i said certainly is not but the country is changing, and i don't think you want to be running for president on an issue of i am against at a marriage when the economy is in so much trouble and so much trouble going on in the world. >> rose: what about the acommunity and their attitude about barack obama? >> i mean, i think the big -- i mean, to me, that is a big question here, i think you saw, i thought you saw barack obama -- i mean if i am reading the stories right i thought you saw barack obama quote unquote evolve and i am one of those people who believe based on some knowledge, as mu as you know i do think he probably never did have a problem with gay marriage and changed his position when he arwanted to run for president ad senate and that's the way the world works when i saw the story about him evolving i saw him go
1:02 pm
in a direction i thought he would go. >> can we be a little bit cynical? >> i just think, you know, frankly, obama's position is pretty appalling here, i mean, you know, all of us sitting around saying, well he obviously believes in same sex marriage, well, if he believes in same sex marriage say it, i mean his position on same-sex marriage as we stand now is exactly the same as the defendants in the proposition eight lawsuit. you know the people who were on the other side from boys and alston those who have been excoriated .. so you know what side is barack obama on? i mean, i think, you know, well he can't do it yet, i mean this is a guy who has made his name as a conscience driven politician, we if he is a nscience driven politician, let'see what he thinks. i think he can do it now, i mean, you cut me off before i finished, i think he can do it now and make the argument, you can make the argument when he ran for president in 2008, as a black guy running for president like coming out in favor of ga marriage that would be like, but
1:03 pm
i think he can do it now, i don't understand what he is doing how, it seems andw cuomo and he has tons, beyond what he lievesand he doesn't have t deal with the cynical, i think the a polled den issue for him to come out and gr it, i don't thini know what he is doing. i don'think most people do. >> maybe it is about leadership. or lack thereof. >> yes, ofnlg, of course. he said he had an evolving attitude about same sex marriage. >> that was a couple of months ago. he is signalling he was moving on the issue, and, again, you know, i mean we have all covered the white house and all dealt with -- i mean executive office building, you kn, the old executive office building, you know, where all like 1,000 political appointees are, tuning there is one person in that building who freeze with the president on this issue? i don't think so. i mean, i think the who democratic party is moving very fast, i don't think it will be possible in 2006 teen, even to be a serious candidate as a democrat without supporting same-sex marriage. and to see the president kind of
1:04 pm
bum blink along and saying, well, maybe, i mean -- well, i am evolving. just get to the end ofhe evolution,. >> rose: i think he would say, look, don't ask, don't tell so i am in the process of trying to change it as fast as i can, i have these other iues, that's what he would argue. >> but there was a case made on don't ask, don't tell. there was, iuess, there was at leastpolitically a case to be made on don't ask don't tell the way he did it, i am not gng to argue with that, but i don't see it, i don't see it, if he supports it he should say it. i know there was some sort of ceremony for gay pride anniversary wednesday, they will use the opportunity to say something there, i certainly would. >> what is the possibility of any federal legislation or anything like that? >> well i thin the issue is not going to move that past right now, i think we are going to have a few more states, maryland, rhode island, maybe oregon, but the states against it are really against it and i
1:05 pm
think once the sort of -- iowa? >> well, iowa was the supreme court imposed it. >> rose: right. >> the supreme court said it was a violation of the iowa constitution not to allow it, but it certainly did not pass on a vote by the legislature or iowa ans, but i think there will probably be ten to 13 sates in the next two or three years th probably have it. but at that point, i think the progress is going to son and at that point it is going to be up to the uted states supre court and that of course depends onable who is on the supreme court. >> i mean, as we wereaying before, 29 statehave amendments against this, and almost eve time voters have ken up the issue directly, they have banned gay marriage, and -- maine. >> maine is going to go the other way. and the legislature approved it and a few months later, voters overturned that decision. so the question is, when does it become, you know, does the vocal
1:06 pm
minority or the local plurality that opposes this issue get outweighed by people who want to see it happen and especially one thing th happened in, what is pass make to me, it was the first time you saw the emergence of this black operative donors, wealthy, paul singer, big hedge fund guy, were putting money into the advocacy is side for day marriage, and you know, former -- they are trying to create a conituency of donors and political interests in the republican party to offset what i think is a very real opposition among most base voters in the party. >> rose: i think they are kidding themselves if they think any significant part of the republican party outside of a handful of states is going to take their side. >> rose: adam you know these guys too, they are trying to create, what? >> they are trying to create room for these guys -- they are trying to create a zone of comfort in the legislatures who will be able to vote in favor of gay marriage, i agree with jeff,
1:07 pm
there is tot a t of places that is going to happen short-term, i still think long-term this igoing to be less and less of a significant issue and not just going t be a cutting edge issue it is now but they think they can target new york and some of the other states they can do theame thing. >> rose: let me go around one more time, do you think it will or be will not be a big issue in 2012 in. >> i do. i ink it is significant issue, particularly to the republican party, and, look, we know that the republican nominee thinks there should be a constitutional amendment not only to st it from expanding but to roll it back where it is now, and i think that is very significant, even if it is not emphasized, in terms of where the national republican party is right now. >> rose: does the opinion matter in terms of the republican debate? >> no, not at all. i mean he is cited more often by democrats than he is by republicans. >> you know what, he is discounted becse his daughter is day, and they, you know, just have decided -- >> rose: lives up to -- >> and no one cares. >> rose: 2012, adam, you think it will not matter much.
1:08 pm
>> in the general election, i think we a talking about different things with jeff, it will matter in the primary caucuses as well. >> rose: why would it matter? how will it mter? i mean, because all of the republicans will say theame thing, will they not? >> in other words it will matter no the extent these candidates will be pushed to take a position as they have been, they have to talk about it, they are pretty much done with it now and sort of committed to it, i just think when the general election cos, wherein september, october, of 2012, we rust won't hear a lot about gay marriage and probably the most you will hear about it is the debates where journalists are asking to try to put t candidates on the spot to talk about it but i just would be surprised if either side, certainly the republicans will talk about gay marage, especially with e way the onomy is rightnow. >> did obama ever talk to the massachusetts issue? >> well he is against same sex marriage he says -- i mean,. >> rose: he is -- >> massachusetts -- they he marriage, the heterosexual couples in massachusetts are in exactly the same state as the homosexual couples, marriage married is married, i it is not
1:09 pm
civil unions, he is against it the last time i checked. >> rose: about whether you can inherit or not. >> well, he said their administration has said they now believe that the defense of marriage act is unconstitutional, so going forward in the first circuit and then in the supreme court, they will be arguing with the plaintiffs in the defense of marriage act. >> rose: thank you. thank you, adam, great to have you back. >> thank you, charlie my pleasure. >> rose: great to have you on the program. newsrooms across america are undergoing major changes, technology, economic pressures in the 2hour news cycle have all contribute add new documentary called pe 1 inside "theew york times" explores what all of this has been in one of the most respected news organization ms. the world. here is the trailer for the film. >> welcome, evybody. we are here the take note of the fact that journalism is alive and well and feisty, especially at the new york times.
1:10 pm
>> 10:30, where we discuss the stories of the day and what we are going to offer. what kind of mpetion petition to get on a we are the new york times and we are dictating -- >> it is a tender age of 31, i still have a year left to be the violent drug snorting thug before i found my way to this guy, one with a family and a job at the new york times. >> the times is really where i wanted to work from when i was very young. i always had this idea of the place where great things than and were done. >> my sources are starting to come out. i don't know why anybody who is a reporter isn't on twitter. >> he just embodies everything about new media. >> i still can't get over the feeling that bryan felt search was a robot assembled to destroy me. >> the old newspaper model is dying. >> as the collision of two worlds, the new world wants to crack it all open. >> this is about wikileaks, to
1:11 pm
drop this off on the front page of the nbc they dropped it off on youtube and waited for everybody to find it. >> the bottom line is wikileaks doesn't need us in the immediate moment we are in the middle of can cutting 100 people out of the staff. >> i am a single parent on well pair. >> i don't have a clear grasp on the enormity of the situation. >> the new york times, could they go out of business? >> if you think of the history of these institutions, water date, an abu ghraib, i think we are in a dangerous moment in american journalism. >> some stories are beyond the database, sometimes people have to walk past the conventional wisdom. >> they asked if anybody wanted to volunteer for baghdad so i am going to iraq. >> news is not -- >> i think to a remarkable degree it fits the agenda.
1:12 pm
>> there are does enz of bureaus all over the world and we are going to see what turns up. i don't think so. >> rose: david, new york times, he is a central figure, and some say the star on page 1, his colleague at the media desk andable also in the film before joininthe times he ran industry blog tvnewser, he wrote for the new york times in 1960s after working in the copy and obituary section and wrote a popular book about the new york times. i am pleased to have them all here to talk about this movie. what did you think of the movie what did it do? what i what it accolish? >> it reaffirmed for me it is still the kingdom and theower. these people are the new members of the times hierarchy and stardom, as you say, david and so is bryan, which t me is pretty much like the old paper,
1:13 pm
in that it is guided by the same spirit of right very hard and sometimes very successfully to tell the truth. >> re: how did this film come into being? >> i knew andrew. >> the director of page 1 had made a previous film, about the rebirth of 2000 and i had a cameo in there, because i was making video at the time, he came to interview maine about another documentary he is working on, a web 2.0, in new york, and he said, i want to shoot the media meltdown, the story of the media meltdown over your shoulder and i just said, well, that is a great idea, andrew, go ask my bosses about that. thinking i can get rid of him that way. >> rose: very clever. >> and to my private, they said, fine. >> so you started doing that for a day or two or a week? >> i did it fofour days, which he and i, and i just turned to
1:14 pm
him and i said i can't do this, i can't have you staring at me with your big you eyes andour, cow eyes and your cameras and my sources were freezing up every time i would do anything, i said, if you go and talk to other people that i work with in, that aren't participating in the film and so i slid bryan under the bus and my other all r colleagues. >> rose: it is about t media department of the new york times, primarily. >> primarily i really think we are the characters through which to talk about journalism, the more i watched the filmnd seen it so man times i have lost count, it is really actually more about news than anything else, more than it is about the new york times but i think the film maker uses us to enter into stories like wikileaks, and entering the stories like tribune where david investigates the bankruptcy. >> rose: and also tells the story the economics of newspapers today. >> yes, today and also a few years ago, you see an arc and you see the recession really take its toll on "the new york times". >> in a very palpable way, there was a middle part that was very, very uncertain there, and andrew
1:15 pm
was there, and he had already sort of breached, you know, the wall, and gotten insight and we all started to get a little uncertain and really scared, and you can watch the movie and see us sort of wondering if we are going to write a layout story and tape our own name. >> rose: tell the storyhat you tell about when you were at the times, when you were there, they say don't spend any time on the phone. get on the scene and do the story. >> i started off and actually in 1953, i just got out of alabama that spring and in the summer of there, i was a copy boy at the new york times, and there were old-timers that are legendary in my mind, not well-known necessarily to the young generation here, but people like russell porter and pet keys and pulizer ize winner two times,. >> rose: a war correspondent. >> if you want to be a journalist, stay off the phone, the phone was the new technology and you have to be there, and
1:16 pm
see the people and look at their faces, not just the gestures but the faces, get the atmosphere in which the story does spring, et cetera, et cetera, so i leaed through legwork, footwork, being there was the mantra. >> has that changed? >> i certainly don't think it has, i think that is what makes the times for knew jesus christ than it ever has been because so many news organizations have fewer boots on the ground and so many local stations and local newspapers are stretched thin and the fact we have boots on the ground makes us special, i think, you know. i really don't agree with bryan, i think it has changed quite a bit, i mean if you look at, watch bryan in the film, he has got the laptop open, and the screen here, the phone there. he is twittering out. >> rose: that's what got him there. >> i think, you know, o editor -- >> where are the boots? >> i don't say no when we are asking to go on a trip, on an assignment we haven't cut back to the point saying no we want to travel to the stories. >> there was a point in this where i think you haveto sort of say or you choose t say damn it, it is "the new york
1:17 pm
times", your point was? >> well, i mean, there is a history and i think it comes from people like me reading e kingdom and the pow at an impressionable age. >> rose: on people like you. >> may i -- the stereo aspect to the place and that there is a kind of new york times exceptionalism and that part of the reason that people hold us to account as severely and ferociously as theydo, for what are, you know, some significant mistakes man pest in the film, is that we have a standard that we hold to regardless of whether we are publishing on the web, publishing in the newspaper and the suggestion of people that not only could the new york times go out of business, but that it would be a civic good, that it did, i found, i find to be fatuous and silly, bause we have lost so much journalistic
1:18 pm
horsepower from the ecosystem of news that it coun't be rerdless of the organization's faults which are, you know, we could argue about all day long, you can't afford to lose as bryan said the boots on the ground, the muscle that, you know, the 1,100 women and men that, you know, make the phone calls, that go to the place. >> rose: but there have been layoffs at the times like every other publication that has faced economic circumstances? >> i would argue that -- >> rose: has there not? >> yes. there is about 150, layoffs, i would argue one of the big achievementsf bill keller's tenure was to most historic recession have seen in the last 100 years he was able to maintain the journalistic footprint of the morniimes that many others weren't able to. >> rose: almost what? >> almost no other has been able to do. >> what is the chick crisis for newspapers and has the new york times figured out a way to have people pay for content been able
1:19 pm
to overcome it? >> i never knew why it was ever debated that peopleho read, get the new york times through the technology shouldn't pay for it. say young people are accustomed to paying for very little, it is not true, they pay for going to college and you get an education by reading the new york times, i think beyond what you are in college, don't know why that should ever have been an issue, the times from the very beginning when there was an opportunity to show itself through the technolo andays beyond just the printed page that we see kicked under our door every morning, i think it should have been paid, i think maybe a strategic error was made by the corporate part of the morkt not to charge, to think that you could make enough by just giving it away, ll that was absurd because that underestimates the value of the very work you guys do every day, and before your genation there was another generation doing the same thing, trying as well-to-do a good job, so i don't know what i am trying to tell you except i am trying to tell you, there is
1:20 pm
nothg that the times does that should not be paidr, because you are getting the bestof the producton earth. >> rose: you pay tribute to the publisher, thatomes under criticism at different times? >> i think it is interesting to listen to gabe talk about that, because gay was the chronicler of the salz burger family and suggested that kings come in all shapes and sizes and perhaps arthur was -- and in essence -- >> it is true and i want to be on record here, i said some terrible things, our friend ken was doing a piece on the new york times and i said something to the effect that, well, you have a bad king every once a while and referring the prese publisher, arthur salz burger the second, jr. i spent, i was quoted, published there in the new yorker, i have come tregr it because durg this last two or three years, and all of the bad things, not only the economics but some of the other issues you ow about, jason blair and judy miller and
1:21 pm
that's all been said again and again so i don't want to waste your time referringt, but i have come to see the new york times in this time of great travail and tension and turmoil and economic duress rise to the occasion of bei a better newspaper today under mr. always burger and bill keller and these people of this current staff, to be the bestaper, better than the papei worked for, i worked under great editor abe rosenthal, where he alive he would hate what i am saying now but the times of this e.r.a. of keller and abrams, abramson and salz burger, jr. is a better paper than it ever has been in my lifetime and i have been affiliated with the new york times as a copy boy and i read the paper every morning, i take three hours, two hours to read that wonderful, awful paper and i stand corrected what i said about salz burger, so it is mea culpa time for me.
1:22 pm
>> rose: good for you. >> one thing you mentioned that is brought out, it relyovers whole range of things, and it also has people from the outside talk about it. wikileaks. was that a big deal for the morning times? >> i think it was, because it captures the tension of the fact that anyone now can be a publisher, anyone can put content on line, can do acts of journalism, even if they are not journalists in that case, you know, we are getting all of this raw material on the internet anyone can surf through and yet we are distilling it and were making sure that we are trying to take names out that could jeoparze people's lives and trying to tell stories and put those raw materials in context. it shows the value of the times, the valuof editing,n't at a time where anybody can put anythi on line. >> over the course of the film, the source, become our partner anthen they become a subject and you can see us kind of sort of get our arms around the monster and figure out, what are
1:23 pm
you to us? >> right. >> rose: one thing this film does, it makes you understand the value of editors. >> might be the most important take away from the film. >> i couldn't agree more are. i think you see people, you know, bryan and i, you know, are good and ambitious reporters, we have a lot of ideas, some of them are good, we don't know which ones. and to have -- and you very much seek -- there is a long run in the film where there is much discussion about nbc, ander the declaring the enof the war, and we are again and 15, what is this story? what is this story and finally our bos said, we have decided what we e going to write. zero. and it is like, and we want alys type our way to understanding, and sometimes it is best to just close your pie hole and see what unfolds. >> rose: we have a scene of david debating against the notion of good riddance to the mainstream media. roll that. >> the news business in this
1:24 pm
country is nothing to be proud of. the media is a technology business. that's what it is. that's what it has always been. technology changes, the media changes. >> overtime, the audiences switch to the web what is worth a buck in print is worth a dime or maybe a penny on the web because we end up competing oftentimes against our own work, aggregated, you might want to check it out, aggregates all manner of content, but i wonder if michael really is going to get rid of mainstream media content, okay, ♪ >> rose: your point, sir?
1:25 pm
>> the future looks like swiss cheese, unless we find a way come -- >> rose: so in the end, is this film a homage to the new york times? >> i think it is an homage to original sourcing, you know, the message is, consider the source. consider the source of journalism and i think a lot of people go along every day without, really thinking about where original reporting is coming from. it includes me until the time where i arrive at this years ago. >> andou wanted to come to the times because? >> i didn't know how to write a newspaper story, i kw how to blog, i lened to blog in college, it is pretty easy, it is either you can sell people to that, you can't teach writing for the new york times. that is the point of that, that's the point of the institution. >> rose: the film is called page 1. thank you all.
1:26 pm
>> funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company, supporting this program since 2002. and american express. additional funding provided by these funders. >> and by bloomberg. a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> be more.
1:27 pm
1:28 pm
1:29 pm


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on